Subject
FW: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov
from the canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
(fwd)
from the canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
(fwd)
From
Date
Body
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Friday, July 02, 2004 8:41 AM -0700
From: Mark Bennett <mab@straussandasher.com>
To: chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu
Subject: FW: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov
from the canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
In speculating about Peck's inspiration for his "strong opinions," Tom Bolt
raises an interesting question: Is there any qualitative
difference between Peck's ravings and VN's Olympian dismissals of nearly
every man or woman who ever put pen to page? I think there is a
difference, a small difference, but one worth noting. VN earned the right
to dismiss other great names as incompetent clods by demonstrating that he
could do better than they. This, to my mind, is what makes VN's "strong
opinions" so interesting. As Wilde wrote in "The Critic as Artist":
"Bad artists always admire each other's work. They call it being
large-minded and free from prejudice. But a truly great artist cannot
conceive of life being shown, or beauty fashioned, under any conditions
other than those he has selected."
When I read VN off-handedly rubbish some unfortunate Titan, I feel a bit
like William Drummond, who had the great good fortune to get drunk with Ben
Jonson and listen to Rare Ben denounce his fellow Elizabethans as hacks and
clowns "He is a great lover and praiser of himself; a contemner and
scorner of others . . ." Drummond noted, and I'm not surprised. If one is
Ben Jonson or Vladimir Nabokov, if one is a truly great artist, one can get
away with this sort of thing. The Dale Pecks of the world cannot. Should
Peck write something in the same league as "The Gift" or "Speak Memory" or
"Lolita" or "Pale Fire", hell, should Dale Peck write something half as
brilliant as "Sebastian Knight," then one might be inclined to take his
savage attacks seriously. Until such happy time, Peck will remain an
amusement, rather like an intelligent hound that is trained to snarl and
growl as it chases it own tail, until
its master tosses it a biscuit and tells it to shut up, and sit down.
Mark Bennett
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:08 PM -0400
From: Thomas Bolt <t@tbolt.com>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov from the
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
------------------
The question of whether the person making an argument is an entity or a
non-entity is irrelevant; it is the argument itself that we must
address--first by checking to see if it is a valid argument (assuming a
correct premise), then by evaluating the premise.
In Peck's case, he has made no valid argument, and there is no evidence
in his writing that he knows how to make one. His editors do not seem to
care, though I would assert that at least part of an editor's job is to
edit for logical soundness and coherence, as well as to kick the tires
of the premise.
I for one am as happy discussing the defects of Nabokov's works as the
many wonders, for even the defects are of great interest.
By the way--where do you suppose Dale Peck picked up his bad habit of
making unsupported pronouncements from on high? He certainly does seem
to have some Strong Opinions!
Cheers,
Tom
PS
VN on Samuel Beckett: "Author of lovely novellas and wretched plays in
the the Maeterlinck tradition." Note that VN labels his opinions
honestly, as Opinions, not "Strong Arguments." The opinions are also
often subtly suggestive when investigated further.
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L
Date: Friday, July 02, 2004 8:41 AM -0700
From: Mark Bennett <mab@straussandasher.com>
To: chtodel@gss.ucsb.edu
Subject: FW: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov
from the canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
In speculating about Peck's inspiration for his "strong opinions," Tom Bolt
raises an interesting question: Is there any qualitative
difference between Peck's ravings and VN's Olympian dismissals of nearly
every man or woman who ever put pen to page? I think there is a
difference, a small difference, but one worth noting. VN earned the right
to dismiss other great names as incompetent clods by demonstrating that he
could do better than they. This, to my mind, is what makes VN's "strong
opinions" so interesting. As Wilde wrote in "The Critic as Artist":
"Bad artists always admire each other's work. They call it being
large-minded and free from prejudice. But a truly great artist cannot
conceive of life being shown, or beauty fashioned, under any conditions
other than those he has selected."
When I read VN off-handedly rubbish some unfortunate Titan, I feel a bit
like William Drummond, who had the great good fortune to get drunk with Ben
Jonson and listen to Rare Ben denounce his fellow Elizabethans as hacks and
clowns "He is a great lover and praiser of himself; a contemner and
scorner of others . . ." Drummond noted, and I'm not surprised. If one is
Ben Jonson or Vladimir Nabokov, if one is a truly great artist, one can get
away with this sort of thing. The Dale Pecks of the world cannot. Should
Peck write something in the same league as "The Gift" or "Speak Memory" or
"Lolita" or "Pale Fire", hell, should Dale Peck write something half as
brilliant as "Sebastian Knight," then one might be inclined to take his
savage attacks seriously. Until such happy time, Peck will remain an
amusement, rather like an intelligent hound that is trained to snarl and
growl as it chases it own tail, until
its master tosses it a biscuit and tells it to shut up, and sit down.
Mark Bennett
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Date: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 2:08 PM -0400
From: Thomas Bolt <t@tbolt.com>
To: Vladimir Nabokov Forum <NABOKV-L@LISTSERV.UCSB.EDU>
Subject: Re: Fw: Dale Peck---drop half of Faulkner and Nabokov from the
canon . COMMENT (fwd) (fwd) (fwd)
------------------
The question of whether the person making an argument is an entity or a
non-entity is irrelevant; it is the argument itself that we must
address--first by checking to see if it is a valid argument (assuming a
correct premise), then by evaluating the premise.
In Peck's case, he has made no valid argument, and there is no evidence
in his writing that he knows how to make one. His editors do not seem to
care, though I would assert that at least part of an editor's job is to
edit for logical soundness and coherence, as well as to kick the tires
of the premise.
I for one am as happy discussing the defects of Nabokov's works as the
many wonders, for even the defects are of great interest.
By the way--where do you suppose Dale Peck picked up his bad habit of
making unsupported pronouncements from on high? He certainly does seem
to have some Strong Opinions!
Cheers,
Tom
PS
VN on Samuel Beckett: "Author of lovely novellas and wretched plays in
the the Maeterlinck tradition." Note that VN labels his opinions
honestly, as Opinions, not "Strong Arguments." The opinions are also
often subtly suggestive when investigated further.
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L
---------- End Forwarded Message ----------
D. Barton Johnson
NABOKV-L